You can find the full spreadsheet here. If you see a controller you’d like more info on, its row value listed here will match the “Detailed Results” tab. Store links are often affiliate.
Overall Statistics:
Wired vs Wireless t-test: t = -10.50, p-value = 0.0000 (statistically significant)
In all plots, the dashed red line corresponds to one frame (16.67 ms at 60 Hz).
This section analyzes the raw capture data from individual controller tests, providing detailed latency distribution insights.
Raw data available: 40 devices with 179,481 total readings.
Showing the 16 devices with the most raw data readings for statistical reliability.
Shows first 200 readings from the 8 devices with the most raw data (minimum 200 readings required). Look for periodic sawtooth patterns indicating polling intervals.
Devices with higher consistency scores have more predictable latency (less variance relative to mean).
These plots show approximate latency ranges using 95% confidence intervals. Due to limited data, some standard deviations were imputed using linear regression. Imputed values are shown in a different color.
Use the filters below to show specific device types and connection methods.
## `height` was translated to `width`.Note: Red error bars indicate imputed standard deviation (estimated via linear regression). Blue bars are measured values.
Top 3 performing devices in each category, separated by wired and wireless connection.
This data was collected using a closed-loop latency testing system consisting of:
The Arduino triggers a button press on the controller under test, and measures the time until the MiSTer core detects the input. Results are captured via serial output in CSV format.
For more details, see the GitHub repository.